San Marcos free press. [volume] (San Marcos, Tex.) 1877-1892, 1887-03-31
The Garfield Case.


perhaps with the episodes at Austin
figured in by Mr.. H. s. Garfield, a
reporter OF the San Antonio Express,
on one side, and the Texas House of
Representatives on the other. Some
two or three weeks ago Mr. Garfield
was debarred the privilege of the re.
porters' table, by resolution OF the
House, because of certain articles
caricaturing and ridiculing members.
Speaker Pendleton constructed this
resolution of expulsion to extend to
the four walls OF the room in which
the House held its sessions, and to
include the lobby, which iss without
the bar of the House. Mr.. Garfield
did not concede this action to be
within the power Of the House or the
Speaker, and on the following day
sought admission to this lobby. Up
on written instructions from the
Speaker, the assistant sergeant-at-
arms refused Mr.. Garfield. admission
to the lobby; and because OF this re-
fusal he swore out a warrant against
both the Speaker and the assistant
sergeant-at-arms, both of whom were
arrested. The House took exceptions
to this proceeding and summoned
Mr.. Canfeld and the authorities OF
the justice court, then trying the case,
to appear before that body and ans.
wer to the charge OF contempt of the
House" After heated debate, Mr..
Garfield was found guilty and SEN
fenced to forty eight hours in the
county Jail, while the justice and his
constable were discharged. When
brought before the bar Of the House
to answer the charge of contempt
Mr.. Garfield said:
81 came into the lobby March l and
stated to the sergeant-at-arms that l
came not as reporter. but rs a pri-
vate citizen, and was elected. l pre-
ferred to test my rights, under my
constitutional privileges as q citizen,
in the courts, as to the constitution
ality of the rulings Of your Speaker,
and with no intention to bring con-
tempt upon your proceedings. The
gentleman from Harris, Mr.. Kirlicks,
has about stated my position. My
object was simply to test the consti'
tutionallty of the action of the House,
as felt 1 had a right to do in the
courts.
This statement strikes The Post as
being manly, and should have been
sufficient to have caused Mr.. Can.
fields discharge. The essence OF
contempt lies in the intention sur
rounding an act, and the accused ex-
plicitly disclaimed any intention OF
contempt OF the body. The Post
has never approved Mr.. Canfeld's
criticisms ON the house, and took oc-
caslon more than once to say as
much, but in this fight it is with him.
And for this reason: Mr. Garfield
believed that a wrong had been per-
petrated upon himself, in that he was
denied the constitutional rights and
privileges of citizen of Texas, and,
believing thus, proceeded to the only
known methods under the law for
even limited redress. Feeling him.
self aggrieved. Mr.. Garfield did that
only which any man Of spirit would
have done under similar circum-
stances-sought the aid of the courts
in vindication of his rights as q man
and citizen-and this attempt OF the
Legislature to destroy privilege
guaranteed to the humblest individ-
ual in the land can be regarded as
nothing short of high-handed out
rage for which there was no warrant
in law, equity, justice or common
sense. The Post is not discussing
this case with q bearing upon Mr..
Garfield as reporter, nor upon his
work as reporter, but in the sense
that it affects citizen of the great
State of Texas. IN the first place it
is belived that the House exceeded
its rightful prerogative in excluding
citizen from place which the con-
stitution declares shall be open to
the public; but be that as it may,
there is no question that the arrest
of a Judge on the bench, and the
summary stopping of the court pro
ceedings, were unwarranted by law
or precedent. and the Judge who
submitted to such an outrage is either
an arrant coward or pig-headed ass.
He should have sent the agents OF
the legislature TO jail for contempt OF
court. Had he have done SO he
would have been sustained. not only
by the higher courts, but by public
opinion as well. 1t affords The Post
no pleasure TO comment thus, but
there is n point beyond which even a
Legislature ought not to be permitted
to go. On this subject the States.
man very pertiDently observes: III
the object Of the House was TO up.
hold its dignity and honor, as was
declared in fulsome oratory, then il
signally failed Of its purpose The
arrest Of tie speaker was not an in
sult to the House. il was not die
tated by eny spirit Of petty revenge
it was despoiled Of any intent ol
personality, it was simply legal way
Of getting at the adjudication Of a
constitutional question The House
has, by its action, made it a personal
question, and upon them must rest
= - L.. u Iii L.. .l-.-.l..r....a...l-